Laserfiche WebLink
<br />stated cui-dc-sacs and right turn lanes have a cost where it could be better spent doing it right the <br />first time. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated eminent domain is for the purpose of streets. Where he breaks with <br />that line of thought on eminent domain is where it is used for economic development. Acquiring <br />property for streets is the purpose that eminent domain was originally designed for, and is still <br />designed for today. The people should receive the value for the land. He does not necessarily <br />enjoy the concept even if it is for streets, but if in lieu of a minivan of kids getting hit pulling out <br />on Highway 5 he could be convinced. <br /> <br />Mr. Jenson stated he appreciates the comments about this being tabled the last time. The <br />applicant appreciates that additional time was taken to look at the other alternatives and the <br />alternatives being brought before the Council tonight. The applicant is frustrated to have the <br />same result after that additional exercise he has gone through, and that was the reason they were <br />pushing for a vote. He recognizes what occurs as the result of a denial and recognizes they are <br />likely to have that result. He asked when this would come before the Council again. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated the applicant should have a feeling of whether the Council is in consensus <br />to go ahead with eminent domain or bargaining for the road to go through. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig indicated he believes it is only fair if the Council is thinking about going <br />down that path that they give some indication of their standing. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated if not, the applicant should ask for the vote. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik indicated the timeline for action is good until <br />October 15th. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated he has safety concerns, and if that road can be punched through to <br />146lh he likes that idea. That has been the stumbling block he has had. <br /> <br />Council member Jeffrey indicated his statement the last time was regarding this going through to <br />1461h. He likes the product, but does not like the way it is getting dumped onto County Road 5. <br />If they can get the road to go through to 146th he could support this project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig commented they have used the word eminent domain, but he does not <br />know that they would have to go that far. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich advised the City is obligated to negotiate initially under State Statute. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen requested clarification that the idea is if there is eminent domain on the <br />middle property for the road that the funds used to acquire that will initially come from the City <br />but then assessed back to the developer so there is not a net loss to the taxpayers. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied he thinks that is the goal; the assessment would be to any <br />property that benefits. <br /> <br />City Council / August 14,2007 <br />Page 15 of 32 <br />